#super-maximum security

"Used at St. Vincent-de-Paul: Metal scanners for airlines?" Montreal Star. September 11, 1970. Page 27. ---- By DUNCAN HAIMERL ---- Airlines, faced with considering more stringent security checks, could adopt prison-type metal detectors to check for weapons on passengers.

But some of the devices, while ideally suited for prison conditions, may mean extra difficulties for airline staffs.

The common one used in prisons is a personnel scanner which an inmate walks through. Any metal on his person is indicated by a bell and a more thorough search is carried out to find the object.

Any metal unfortunately means just that, and the metal can include a zip per, a ring, a watch or a pen as well as a knife or similar weapon.

However, a trained person might be able to tell just how much metal is there and a high meter reading and steadily-ringing bell could mean a gun.

Jean Page, director of the Special Correctional Unit at St.-Vincent-de-Paul Penitentiary his Rens Personnel Scanner, an eight-foot high walkthrough machine does the prison job with ease.

"But we know what the inmate is wearing," he said. "What will they do on the airlines? Ask all the passengers to wear coveralls with nylon zippers? I don't think it's what they want."

A smaller hand-held metal detector may be the answer, he said, because it's held against the person's clothing and indicates where exactly the metal is and roughly how much there is.

Sensitive enough to detect a dime in a person's hand or pocket, the Transfrisker emits a varying tone de pending on the size of the metal object and could check luggage for large metal objects.

Some airlines already use a type of metal detector for passengers and lug- gage but officials were hesitant to point out what type they used.

Suggestions were made that fluoroscope or x-ray machines could be used. However, this could mean passengers would be given above-normal exposure to the machines, with uncertain health effects.

Two Canadian suppliers of the metal detection units said they have not been contacted by airlines since the recent rash of hijackings prompted tighter security measures.

But they added they would be ready to co-operate with the airlines' requests. Some checks may be made with airlines already using the devices to determine their suitability and also see whether design changes must be made.

NEW USE FOR METAL DETECTORS? How prison-type metal detectors could be used for checking for guns on plane passengers is demonstrated by Edgar Robitaille, assistant security chief of the Special Correctional Unit at St. Vincent-de-Paul Penitentiary, and reporter Duncan Haimerl. In background is an eight-foot high walkthrough detector called a Rens Personnel Scanner.

Bureau of Prisons Annual Report, 1965. Top photos from wraparound cover show control room in central control at U. S. Penitentiary, Marion, Illinois. Bottom left photo shows a guard tower. Both photos by Harr, Hedrich - Blessing, Chicago.

"Gas jets in federal prison cells denied by commissioner," Montreal Star. December 16, 1969. Page 3. --- Canadian Press OTTAWA - Penitentiaries Commissioner Allen J. MacLeod denied yesterday that cells at a federal prison near Montreal are equipped with gas jets to quell excited prisoners.

But Mr. MacLeod said in an interview the contention that prisoners are frequently gassed as a control measure is "ridiculous it's just not true.'

However, he said that guards in some prisons carry cans of "tear gas. shall we say," as a defence against violent prisoners.

The contention that gas jets are installed in the ceilings of the special correctional unit at St. Vincent de Paul Penitentiary was made by Robert J. Deslauriers, assistant research director for the Public Service Alliance of Canada, and backed up by a correctional officer.

They were part of a union move seeking better wages and working conditions for about 2,000 federal prison employees. A dispute with the treasury board, the federal bargaining agent, is before an arbitration tribunal headed by Mr. Justice André Montpetit of Montreal, a Quebec Superior Court judge.

His eyebrows rose somewhat as Mr. Deslauriers, reading a brief, said that guards at St. Vincent de Paul "are constantly bombarded by sudden deafening outbursts of yells and cries of men clinging to cell bars screaming to high heaven about their desperate state, of others being gassed to semi-consciousness by the emission of gas through jets permanently installed in the wall or ceiling of the cells, of dealing with homosexuality."

Mr. Justice Montpetit interrupted to ask who had written this and Mr. Deslauriers said he had.

The vivid description was used to illustrate the need for shorter hours, a shorter working career and better pay for guards. The brief frequently mentioned the depressing and dangerous aspects of the work. It said that since a rehabilitation program gave prisoners more freedom of movement in 1961, violent incidents in which guards have been injured, held hostage or killed has numbered in the hundreds. Mr. Deslauriers said in an interview he visited the special correctional unit in 1967, before it was opened, and was shown the gas jets by a reluctant warden.

"He didn't want to show them to me." Mr. Deslauriers said. "I mentioned that's how you treat animals.

"Whether or not they use it, it's inhumane."

A guard, also helping present the union brief, said the jets have been used often since the prison opened. It is designed for hard-core prisoners who don't respond to incentives to rehabilitation in other institutions.

Mr. MacLeod said there is a special program "for trouble-makers" at the special unit but the gas jets were news to him. Negotiations between the guards and the government collapsed several weeks ago after the government put an offer of two per cent on the table.

The guards said the government position also would remove some of the benefits they now enjoy.

At least 10 of the 26 points they raised for arbitration yesterday were rejected by treasury board negotiators as non-negotiable.

The guards, who staff 34 federal institutions, have voted to hold an illegal strike if progress isn't made in arbitration.

Their brief said the government has consistently refused to recognize their special occupational problems and an explosive situation has developed as a result.

They are asking an average 13.7- per-cent wage increase retroactive to Oct. 1, 1968, and an average 8.5 per cent retroactive to Oct. 1, 1969.

This would raise the maximum in the lowest grade to $7,812 from the current $6,133 and in the highest to $9,928 from $7,843,

Among the union demands rejected as non-negotiable by the treasury board bargainers:

-A $25-a-shift bonus for handling canine patrols so vicious the guards are often bitten.

-Access to personal files to counter mistakes or "slanderous" reports. -$1,000 annual bonuses for work in maximum security prisons rather than the present $700.

"Rehabilitation leave" at age 55 or after 25 years of service, with pension at 60.

"Literary prizes go to prison inmates," Montreal Star. February 28, 1969. Page 30. ---- By DUSTY VINEBERG The Creative Awards Association yesterday presented awards for fiction and poetry to three inmates of the Special Correctional Unit, the super-maximum security installation at St. Vincent de Paul.

The Association is a private organization only a little over a year old which has been running classes in art, literature, theatre and other activities every week night at Leclerc Institute, another part of the St. Vincent de Paul complex.

The CAA also handed out five prizes to men in Leclerc who produced work in the creative writing program.

All work was read and judged by novelist Hugh MacLennan, Professor of English at McGill University.

To be published On the strength of his judgment that, though sometimes uneven, it has literary merit, program coordinator Mrs. Gertrude Katz is assembling it for publication.

The winning entry. "Stanley P. U. Smart," which brought its writer the $100 award. is about an old man searching for proof of his identity to present to pension authorities. According to Mrs. Katz, it is characterized throughout by skillfully suggested meanings on several levels and evocative descriptive passages.

The awards were presented by Mrs. Kay Lines, president of the CAA, in the Special Correctional Unit. At the time this installation was

built, outcries were raised against its windowless, super-security atmosphere. It has been open only a year, under the direction of War- den Jean Pagé and Assistant Warden Jacques Lessard.

Mrs. Katz said she originally started working with one inmate within its walls. Subsequently she asked poet Irving Layton to give the men a poetry reading which sparked more of them to try this form of self-expression. She says that as soon as an inmate shows signs of producing a sizable amount of work, "I get him someone to work with him."

The volume of work to be read and criticized and the correspondence involved make it difficult for one per son to handle many inmates, she said.

At the moment, poet George Bowering is working with one English-speaking inmate and Leandré Bergeron, Professor of Contemporary French Literature at Sir George Williams University. is handling the work of three French-speaking men. Also in the program is fourth-year McGill University English major René Akstinas, who has taken on two young prisoners.

Not censored Prison authorities permit manuscripts to go back and forth through the mail uncensored. The relationship between the writer and his editor is apt to be intense. The man who wrote the winning story calls Mrs. Katz his "mentor" (sometimes tormentor, he adds.) and has developed a protective attitude towards her while making it clear that "she does not know everything about prisons yet.'

Both the contact with "outsiders" and the feeling that people care are important to inmates.

The CAA group has based their program of studies, taught by talented teachers, on the idea that "it may be superheated but wrongly directed intelligence, in correlation with environment and various sorts of exacerbated sensibilities, that land men in trouble in the first place."

As Mrs. Lines puts it: non-conforming people are usually creative. Criminals are non-conforming. Therefore, criminals may be creative."

CREATIVE EFFORT RECOGNIZED: Mrs. Kay Lines, president of the Creative Awards Association, and creative writing coordinator Mrs. Gertrude Katz give awards to three inmates in the Special Correctional Unit at St. Vincent de Paul.

"Rough, tough and sore after convict Olympics," Montreal Star. March 21, 1970. Page 3. --- By PAUL DUBOIS ---- The roughest, toughest, meanest convicts in the province slept like babes in the woods last night but woke up aching all over this morning.

But none of them complained bitterly.

They had agreed to take part in an experiment devised by Warden Jean Page of the Special Correctional Unit, located next door to St. Vincent de Paul Penitentiary in neighboring Laval.

The experiment, termed a success by inmates, grounds and prison heads alike, consisted of a field day on Ice for the inmates a sort of winter Olympic games contest.

The inmates at the SCU, the Canadian Penitentiary Service's special, super-maximum security unit which houses the nation's toughest criminals, had been participating in winter sports. But they had never before competed against one another.

In many cases, the inmates temperaments were not conducive to good sportsmanship.

Yesterday, Warden Pagé decided to break up his inmates into teams broomball, tug-o-war and pit them against one another.

Even with the penitentiary chaplain present, some of the toughest inmates proved to be the sorest losers and used foul language to prove it. But, as it turned out, they were in a minority.

While unarmed guards mingled with the inmates and acted as referees in the various contests, others heavily-armed stood watch along the walls as the convicted murderers, rapists, muggers and arsonists played winter games.

The field day was broken into three parts. First to participate were those who only recently arrived at the special unit from other penal institutions.

The second part featured those considered to be in protective custody - convicted criminals who, for the most part, were at one time witnesses for the prosecution at various trials. They are those inmates who cannot be integrated with other inmates for fear of reprisals.

Yesterday afternoon's games featured some of the nation's most feared men. Most of them are considered hardened criminals whose chances of being rehabilitated are slim, to say the least...

While in the first two parts of Warden Pagé's experiment almost all of the inmates took part in the organized games, less than half of the "tough cases" bothered to play.

Many of them stood aside, ribbing other inmates for taking part in "sissy games."

But there was no outbreak of violence save for the odd and brief outbursts of tempers. Warden Pagé had expected such reactions. Security precautions were at the maximum and ready to handle any emergency. There was none.

Yesterday's field-day also marked the end of the special correctional unit's winter sports program.

It may have also marked the beginning of a regular field day program for the country's hardened criminals.

"They were given a break," a guard remarked, "and they didn't blow it."

Victor Malarek, “Prisoners see riots if Millhaven used as problem dump.” The Globe and Mail. 15 Dec 1979. p. 14. --- “When other prisons decide they can't handle problems with their prisoners, they dump them here. They come from all over the country. We're saying we don't want this to continue. It's regressive. It's either go forward or regress.” --- Millhaven ON -- MILLHAVEN - Inmates at the maximum-security penitentiary here have warned there could be a riot if the institution continues to be used as a dumping ground for the country's problem prisoners.

In a letter to Donald Yeomans, commissioner of corrections for the Canadian Penitentiary Service, the Millhaven Prisoners Committee wrote: 

We're tired of the stigma attached to this prison which has caused the prisoners . . . to be branded and stigmatized to the point that life is almost intolerable.

We have worked hard at turning this penitentiary around insomuch as we try to be reasonable in our requests and demands, and also peaceful in our protests. This has been our policy over the past 18 months or so and we hope it will continue that way in the future, but if we're forced to accept every other prison's prisoner problems then . . . this type of situation could turn violent and costly . . .

Henry Neufeld, warden of Millhaven, said yesterday he had not read the letter, which he said the inmates smuggled out by giving it to you. It should have gone through proper channels. Technically both you and the inmates have violated the rules of the institution.

Mr. Neufeld plans to discuss the contents of the letter with the committee in the coming week. The points in it have not be brought to our attention, which is peculiar since the members of this particular committee are quite responsible.

One inmate charged in an interview at the prison that penitentiary officials are using Millhaven as a psychological terror tactic in controlling inmates in the federal prison system.

When other prisons decide they can't handle problems with their prisoners, they dump them here. They come from all over the country. We're saying we don't want this to continue. It's regressive. It's either go forward or regress, he said.The committee pointed out that transfers in numerous cases take inmates hundreds and thousands of miles from their families and friends, which in most if not all cases limits contact. This only adds fuel to the fire. . .

The group insisted it no longer wants Millhaven to be used as a control factor for other prisons. A maximum-security penitentiary in Ontario is no different than a maximum-security penitentiary in British Columbia.

Mr. Neufeld said there is no policy that we take problem prisoners. Prisoners are transferred from time to time to other institutions if it looks as if they are troublemakers who are gathering a following. We move them to break down this power base and defuse any disruptive activities.

The inmates are moved to whatever institution is appropriate. We also transfer problem prisoners to other prisons, the warden said.

Aside from what was in the letter, inmates also expressed concern that prisoners classified as medium-security risks are being sent to the maximum-security institution. They believe this is being done deliberately to keep the population up, to justify having all these coppers (guards) here. They're just trying to protect their jobs.

“Since 1977, the Service has operated separate units for those inmates who are considered to seriously threaten the safety of others. Originally, Special Handling Units were established within Millhaven Institution and the Correctional Development Centre. These units were subsequently replaced by purpose-built facilities at Saskatchewan Penitentiary and Regional Reception Centre (Quebec). A relatively small number of inmates, because of their violent behaviour in the institutions, have demonstrated that they require controls beyond those found within a maximum security institution. Since the inception of special handling/high maximum security units, 558 inmates (to 1989.10.05) have been incarcerated in these units. In general, these inmates are more likely to have been sentenced for a violent crime (only 15 had no previous record of violence), more likely to commit indictable violent acts while incarcerated, and more likely to commit violent acts when released than is the rest of the offender population. Specifically, this small group of individuals have been involved in 974 staff and inmate assaults within the institutions, 155 murders, 44 attempted murders, and 208 hostage incidents. WHAT IS NEEDED Violence within the institutions cannot be tolerated. Those inmates who commit violent acts must be removed from the normal inmate population and subjected to increased controls until such time as they indicate that they can control their violent behaviour and return to normal association. During the period of removal from the normal inmate population, the inmate must be required to address his violent tendencies, and thus, the Service must provide him the means to do SQ.

It is important to note that the removal of the violent inmate from the normal inmate population serves two purposes. Firstly, it reinforces the Service's stance that violent acts will not be tolerated, providina a denunciation of violence. Secondly, it reduces the risk of violence in the institutions, creating an environment in which staff and inmates can interact with a reasonable assurance of safety and in which an active intervention approach is tenable. 

OPTIONS CONSIDERED A number of methods of removing inmates from the population were examined. The approaches considered were: punitive dissociation; administrative segregation; transfer to another institution; transfer to a Regional Psychiatric or Treatment Centre; and transfer to the currently existing high maximum security units. As well, a more controlled maximum security institution and a small hiah maximum security unit in each region were considered. It was the consensus of the committee that these approaches met neither the needs of the violent inmates nor the responsibilities of the Service in relation to these inmates. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE It is recommended that a regime be established for the violent inmates, which will provide both reasonable controls and programming designed to meet their specific needs, especially those related to their violent behaviour. Such a regime could be implemented in the existing high maximum security facilities. 

I. WHO SHOULD BE TRANSFERRED TO A SPECIAL UNIT? A Service-wide policy of "zero tolerance" is warranted for homicide, hostage-taking, and serious assault. All inmates who commit these acts of violence should be automatically transferred to the special unit for a set period of time during which a comprehensive assessment would,be undertaken. The assessment would be used to determine whether the inmate requires the intervention and controls afforded by the regime established in the unit or whether other options such as placement in a Regional Psychiatric Centre are viable. 

Other inmates who commit less serious acts of violence, who are strongly suspected of committing a violent act, who make serious threats, or who otherwise show a propensity for violence may be considered for transfer to a special unit, if such a transfer is determined to be the only viable option to ensure the safety of others. If transferred to the special unit, these inmates would remain in the unit for a set period to undergo a comprehensive assessment to determine whether the inmate should remain in the unit for treatment or whether other options should be pursued. 

II. DIFFERENTIATION OF VIOLENCE Violent behaviour is symptomatic of a variety of underlying causes. Violent inmates can be considered as falling within one of the following broad categories: i) those who are.psychiatrically disturbed; ii) those who are behaviourally disordered; and iii) those who resort to violence to achieve their own objectives. These different underlying causes of violence have implications for any program regime for the affected inmates. i) The psychiatrically disturbed inmates must have access to appropriate treatment. This treatment could be provided bv Regional Psychiatric Centres or by provincial psychiatric institutions. However, the transfer of these violent and unpredictable inmates to these facilities would likely prove disruptive and hinder or curtail treatment programs for others. - Therefore, it is recommended that a psychiatric wing be created within the unit designated for violent inmates. ii) Behaviourally disordered inmates are those with fundamental control problems, whether they lack internal behavioural controls or whether they choose not to apply any control. Included in this group are inmates who react explosively to situations, those who act impulsively, and those who act violently under the influence of an intoxicant. An appropriate regime for these inmates must combine a decrement of external controls while fostering the development of internalized behaviour control. Specific programming approaches should include components such as conflict resolution, anger management, and alcohol and drug treatment.

iii) Functionally violent inmates are those who consciously and deliberately resort to violence as a means of achieving their own objectives. These inmates may use violence to effect an escape, to collect debts, or to intimidate others; Many of these individuals are capable of participating in prescribed activities but it is difficult to assess their commitment to altering their violent behaviour. These inmates should be constructively occupied and should be counselled to reject violence as a means of accomplishing goals. 

III. CONTROL It is evident that any regime for the management of violent inmates must have an element of control. These inmates have demonstrated by their violent behaviour that they require control beyond that found in a normal maximum security institution. However, the controls should be no more restrictive than that required to ensure a reasonable level of safety for staff and inmates. Although inmates may initially be subjected to severely restricted freedom of movement and association, these restrictions should be gradually lifted as the inmates show that they can behave more responsibly. Restraint equipment should be applied on an exceptional basis, only for those inmates whose performance indicated a need for such control. Face-to-face contact, free of barriers, is a vital element of any counselling'or treatment program. Staff safety in such situations can be assured through a team approach or interviews can be conducted across a table with the staff member's back to the door if necessary.  ... V. ASSESSMENT Each inmate transferred to the special unit would be required to undergo a comprehensive assessment in order to determine an appropriate intervention strategy and the required level of control. In view of the high incidence of mental disorders revealed bv the "Mental Health Survey of Federally Incarcerated Offenders", psychological and psychiatric components to the assessment are crucial. As a result of this assessment, a detailed correctional treatment plan to specifically address the inmate's violent behaviour would be prepared for and with the inmate, clearly defining expectations of and potential outcomes for the inmate. The ultimate objective of the plan should be correcting the violent behaviour so that the inmate may return to a normal population at the earliest reasonable time. A critical element of the plan would be in which institution, treatment facility or special unit the intervention strategy would be most effective. Therefore, at this point, a decision would be made to transfer the inmate from or to retain him in the special unit. If the inmate is transferred, the receiving facility would be expected to use the correctional treatment plan developed following assessment as a base document. 

VI. PROGRAM SCOPE Programming within the special unit should be designed to assist the inmate in addressing his need to change his behaviour, to allow him to participate in constructive activities, and to allow him to demonstrate increasing capacity to interact with others with decreased controls. The following elements are considered as essential programming components:

• psychiatric and psychological intervention; • treatment programs, such as anger management, conflict resolution, or substance abuse treatment; • employment opportunities ranging from in-cell activities to a workshop setting; • personal development opportunities, such as living skills, self-help groups, or culturally-based activities; • recreational opportunities designed to foster effective use of leisure time; • pastoral counselling.  .... CONCLUSIONS 1. The Service needs a special facility for the control and treatment of violent inmates. The current approach and operation of the high maximum security units does not adequately address the needs of those individuals. 2. All inmates who commit murder, hostage-taking, or serious assault will be transferred to such a facility for assessment. 3. Other inmates who demonstrate a propensity for violence may be considered for placement alternatives, including transfer to the facility. 4. An individualized correctional treatment plan will be developed to specifically address the causes of the violent behaviour, prescribe treatment options, and outline a plan for return to a normal population at the earliest possible time. 5. Psychiatrically disturbed violent inmates require separate and special intervention within the facility. 6. Participation in programming and-success in addressing identified needs will determine transfer to normal population. 7. The operation of the facility shall include: a) comprehensive assessment capability to identify the causes of the inmate's violence; b) active intervention with inmates to encourage them to address their violent behaviour; c) capacity to address the individual needs of inmates with psychiatric problems; d) the lowest level of control possible; restraint equipment to be used only as response to threatening or violent behaviour and based on individual assessment of risk; . e) open contact among staff and inmates; f) a team approach to programming involving case management, security, program staff and the inmate; g) incentives to encourage and motivate constructive use of time; h) ongoing staff training to increase awareness/understanding of violent behaviour and appropriate intervention techniques; and I) the maintenance of clear and close links with case workers responsible for the follow-up with the violent inmates in the normal institutions.

“L’enfer du Centre de développement correctionnel,” Le Devoir. August 29, 1980. Page 06. --- par Edgar Roussel --- Alors détenu dans un «Centre de développement correctionnel», M. Edgar Roussel avait adressé au député fédéral Mark MacGuigan, devenu ministre des Affaires extérieures, une lettre manuscrite sur les conditions de détention. La Ligue des droits et libertés qui en avait obtenu copie en avait publié la teneur voici peu de mois. Ce document, daté du 12 avril 1980, prend une actualité particulière à la lumière des événements survenus cette semaine à l’Institut Laval, événements auxquels M. Roussel a présumément été mêlé. En voici le texte intégral. --- DEPUIS le 29 mars 1978, je suis détenu au Centre de développement correctionnel (CDC) où je sers une peine d'emprisonnement à vie avec éligibilité à 20 ans. Sur les pénitenciers fédéraux, tout a été dit, il ne me reste plus qu’à le redire, sauf quand il s'agit d'unités spéciales de détention, telles le CDC dont il sera question dans cette lettre. La raison d’être de ce genre d'institutions selon la directive no 174 du Commissaire national est de préparer la réinsertion pénitentiaire de détenus considérés comme dangereux.

Pour ce faire l’administration offre un programme que je vous propose d’examiner soigneusement afin de découvrir de quelle façon originale le système oeuvre afin que se réalise la métamorphose tant souhaitée, pour que le chrysalide devienne papillon, comment en nous déconnectant de la vie on prétend nous faire renaître à la vie. On dénombré quatre paramètres fixes comme des miradors à l’intérieur desquels ce programme est élaboré: une cellule, une salle commune, une cour extérieure, et pour chapeauter le tout, un département de socialisation.

C’est au CDC que le temps passé en cellule se situe parmi le plus élevé dans les pénitenciers fédéraux du Canada. Afin d'éviter que le détenu ne sombre dans l'ennui ou pis encore dans la folie, l'administration accorde ce que d’autres institutions refusent catégoriquement à leur population, soit un appareil de télévision. Ce cadeau dont le detenu est bénéficiaire est on ne peut plus significatif quant au désarroi dans lequel se trouve celui-ci lorsque laissé à seul. Mais, c’est davantage un aveu d'échec et aussi un manque flagrant d'imagination, ce qui est plus grave encore.

Les premiers jours, on s’en sert de façon démesurée, pour diminuer graduellement sa consommation et finalement l'utiliser de nouveau mais cette fois, pour couvrir les bruits qu'auparavant on ne percevait pas.

La télévision agit tantôt comme une aspirine pour calmer la souffrance tantôt comme un prisme par lequel le monde extérieur nous parvient. Après des mois de ce régime c'est la nausée, la répulsion; on ferme l'appareil pour faire connaissance avec un phénomène nouveau: le bruit! Fouilles, rondes de gardiens, tout est subordonné au bruit, qui en cellule est omniprésent plus que partout ailleurs, jamais d’accalmie. Quand très tard le soir on parvient enfin à s’endormir, lorsque le sommeil vient rétablir l'équilibre dangereusement rompu durant la journée, c’est la ronde de nuit qui commence. À chaque heure, interminablement, le bruit des pas du gardien effectuant sa ronde résonne sur le plafond de la cellule. Au CDC on a trouvé un moyen original de compter les détenus, ça se fait par le haut; il est possible au gardien d'avoir une pleine vue sur le captif par un châssis à meme le plafond. Cependant, il est toujours possible de rattraper le sommeil perdu en sacrifiant la marche quotidienne. Or, c’est justement le temps que choisissent les gardiens pour fouiller les cellules des detenus qui sont à l'extérieur. Ils arrivent dans la rangée telle une meute, le museau en l’air, et bang! dans les murs afin de voir s’il n'y a pas de trous, bang! au plafond pour vérifier si le châssis nya pas été coupe et bang! sur la trappe à air. Une fois leur travail terminé, ils s’en vont en n'oubliant surtout pas de faire refermer les portes de cellules simultanément dans un fracas infernal ; adieu sommeil et tranquillité tant convoités!

 Pour ce qui est de l’aération il serait difficile d’en parler parce qu'elle est inexistante: pas de fenetre, des portes pleines et cet air lourd qui pèse tel un voile opaque.

L’été, c'est un four crématoire que l'inactivité la plus totale rend intolérable; nous suons à ne rien faire. Le matin, symphonie de raclages de gorges, de mouchages de nez, de toux rauques afin de dégager les voies respiratoires.

Je couche à même le sol de ma cellule depuis près de deux ans, la tête appuyée sur le bas de la porte pour bénéficier de la plus petite brise, richesse incomparable.

Pour les moments hors de la cellule, une salle commune est mise à notre disposition tous les soirs de 18 h 30 à 22 h 30 mais jamais plus de dix détenus à la fois. Cette pratique fait partie de la socialisation; on veut nous apprendre à être sociable par petits groupes pour ensuite nous plonger dans une population de trois à quatre cents détenus avec les problèmes d'adaptation que cela implique.

Quelques jeux de société, une autre télévision et de la surveillance, beaucoup de surveillance. Cette salle commune est à toute fin pratique une cellule un peu plus spacieuse que celle dans laquelle nous sommes confinés la plupart du temps faut bien le dire.

Nous disposons pour les activités extérieures d’une cour de 75 pieds par 75 pieds où encore une fois jamais plus de dix détenus ne sont admis, ni plus ni moins; c’est une fixation administrative. L’été, le vent est coupé par les hauts murs tandis que, de l’asphalte dont le sol est recouvert, monte cette chaleur accablante; pas de verdure ni bancs, rien sauf de l’asphalte, du ciment et du fer.

Comme activités physiques, nous pratiquons la boxe sur un sac de guenilles payé a même notre argent au prix de $172. L’administration a raté une excellente occasion de faire preuve de justice car dans toutes les autres institutions cet article est défrayé à même un budget (loisir) réservé à cette fin. Toutes les activités physiques sont pratiqués à nos risques à cause de la surface asphaltée. La quasi totalité de la population souffre d’un problème musculaire quelconque; à cet effet, il serait intéressant de jeter un coup d'oeil sur les requêtes médicales et de compter les détenus qui ont demandé des espadrilles spéciales.

Notre plus grand réconfort et seul contact avec le monde extérieur nous le devons à nos visites; celles-ci sont fixées par l'administration au jour et à l’heure qu’il lui convient. Ce privilège est dispensé parcimonieusement le mercredi et jeudi de chague mois. Au CDC l’affectation est considérée comme une faveur, prodiguée au compte-gouttes et régie comme telle.

Pas de contact avec nos parents, femmes et enfants, c’est de cette manière que l’administration prône l’épanouissement de l’individu.

Voici quelques années, les responsables d'un «zoo» sont allés chercher un éléphant-femelle à l'autre bout du monde our que le mâle captif ne s'ennuie pas. L'espace réservé aux animaux est réaménagé sans cesse afin qu’il s’apparente le plus possible à leur habitat naturel: toutes proportions gardées, ils disposent dans leurs parcs de plus d'espaces que nous.

Pour compléter le programme, un département de socialisation, composé d’un agent de classement ainsi que d’un psychologue, c’est sans contredit le secteur qui présente le plus de carences. Ces spécialistes en sciences humaines, nous les rencontrons quand nous sommes au bout du rouleau et que tout risque de basculer, alors nous bénéficions de leurs «lumières».

Leur préoccupation première est de savoir si, dans l’état où nous sommes, nous envisageons d’attaquer un membre du personnel ou, ce qui est beaucoup moins grave, l’objet de notre agression sera intra-spécifique. Une fois cette tâche accomplie, ces suppôts de l'administration vont rendre compte de leurs conclusions et c’est sur ja foi de leurs témoignages itérera un déque le comité national transférera un détenu. Donc, plus souvent qu’autrement, le jugement des membres du comité, quoique bien intentionné, sera fondé sur des rapports faussés au départ parce que puisés à même une situation faussée alors que le détenu est en proie au désarroi le plus total.

Tous les spécialistes sont unanimes quand ils affirment qu’une détention de plus de cinq ans cause des troubles irréversibles et ils ne parlaient pas d’unités spéciales. Ce que nous subissons ne vise qu’à nous rendre bestiaux, à développer des instincts de tueurs. Il existe plusieurs exemples de criminels ayant séjourné plus pu moins longtemps en ségrégation et qui sont autant d’exemples de ce que j’avance.

Je me contenterai d'en citer quatre, que j’ai personnellement connus, et dont il m’a été possible de suivre le cheminement, il s’agit de Jacques Mesrine, Richard Blass, Jean-Paul Mercier et Jean Lachapelle.

Tous ont certains points en commun: ils ont passé plusieurs années en ségrégation et tous sont morts aujourd'hui pour avoir refusé de revivre, ne serait-ce qu'une journée, ce qu'ils avaient connu dans le passé.

Il serait peut-être utile ou enrichissant de connaître leurs agissements après avoir connu la ségrégation.

Jean Lachapelle, enfermé environ six ans dans une cellule, a plaidé coupable à neuf accusations de meurtres à son retour derrière les barreaux; sans compter qu’au cours de son évasion, l’ultime il va sans dire, il fut lui-même troué de balles.

Quant à Richard Blass sa mort lui a évité d’être accusé d’une quinzaine de meurtres. Pour ce qui est de Jean-Paul Mercier (trois ans, comme Blass, de ségrégation) il avoue être l’auteur du meurtre de deux garde-chasse, alors qu’il était évadé, pour éviter d’être reconnu, ce qui lui aurait valu quelques années de ségrégation (isolation). En ce qui concerne Jacques Mesrine, une lecture attentive des deux volumes qu’il a rédigés est plus que révélatrice quant à l’état mental où l’ont conduit les années d’isolement en cellule.

Aucun de ces quatre individus n’avait été condamné pour meurtre avant de faire de la ségrégation; est-ce que cela est dû au hasard? Libre a vous de conclure comme vous l’entendez. Le système vise à rapetisser le criminel, comprimer la moindre initiative, en un mot assassiner sa personnalité pour la rendre conforme au microcosme dans lequel on le force à évoluer. Quand le détenu est devenu suffisamment fourbe, hypocrite et menteur, qu’il peut feindre de la reconnaissance pour ses bourreaux, alors là, il est éligible a un transfert.

Les individus considérés comme cas «dangereux» sont le fruit d’un folklore perpétué par les rites dont la fonction est de garder intact le souvenir de nos actions.

Rien ne peut effacer une action, et croire que le châtiment pourrait provoquer une rédemption est un leurre. Quand on tient à changer l’individu, ce n’est ni plus ni moins qu'un effort par un acte arbitraire pour le rendre semblable à nous, alors que moi, je réclame le droit à la différence.

Tous les détenus amenés ici en même temps que moi ont été transférés depuis. Alors, seule une soif inaltérable de vengeance peut expliquer ma présence au CDC. Le dernier détenu du groupe est parti le 10 avril 1980 et son palmarès parle par lui-même; dernièrement ce type écopait d'une sentence d’un an pour agression avec couteau.sur deux officiers du CDC. Il avait été préalablement accusé de tentative de meurtre mais les jurés ont accepté de réduire l’accusation; selon eux, le détenu était incapable de juger du caractère de son geste à cause des conditions inhérentes a sa détention qui avait altéré sa raison.

II y a quelque temps on libérait un détenu du CDC pour le remettre directement dans la société. Quelques mois auparavant, cet individu était considéré trop dangereux pour être transféré dans un pénitencier à sécurité maximum.

Par cette longue lettre, j’ai tenté de vous fournir le plus d’éléments possible qui pourraient vous permettre de percevoir de l’intérieur la situation qui est mienne depuis trop longtemps. Aujourd'hui, il m’arrive de parler seul, de rire sans raison ou encore d’être secoué par des spasmes nerveux. Je sens que quelque enose détraque dans le mécanisme et si personne n’intervient en ma faveur, le pire est à prévoir. Le degré de saturation est atteint, un incident si minime soit-il pourrait être le déclencheur pouvant conduire à une action désespérée.

Depuis deux longues et interminables années, je n’ai pas serré ma femme, ma mère ni ma fille et deux longues années aussi j’ai été sans voir le clair de lune, les étoiles; au plus vil des animaux, ce droit n’est pas nié. Konrad Lorenz affirme qu’il est dangereux de cerner un animal dans un coin sans aucune chance de fuite. Frederic Nietzche postule quant à lui dans son oeuvre intitulé «Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra» que l’homme a fait du loup un chien et de l'homme lui-même le meilleur animal domestique de l’homme. Il dénonce aussi la cruauté vêtue des oripaux de la justice, en introduction de ce même volume: «C’est lors des tragédies, des combats de taureaux et des crucifixions que l’homme s’est jusqu'ici senti le mieux sur la terre; lorsqu'il s’inventa l’enfer, ce fut son paradis sur terre» (P. XXIV) 

C'est au nom et en vénérant la pensée de ces grands hommes que je vous demande aujourd’hui d’intercéder en ma faveur. Déjà en 1976 alors que vous agissiez à titre de président d'un sous-comité enquêtant sur la violence dans les pénitenciers, vous dénonciez l'ineptie des administrateurs. Votre nouvelle fonction vous donne le rayonnement, le pouvoir suffisant pour améliorer ma condition, c’est le but de ma requête. 

C’est le but de ma requête. Si ce document devait servir pour une défense ultérieure devant les tribunaux, c'est que la mutation de chrysalide au papillon aura été un échec.